Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to modernize its station-conducted contest rule, which was originally adopted in 1976.
As a result, regardless of whether the FCC dictates a prescribed set of material terms to be disclosed, the terms will still have to satisfy state disclosure requirements.The brokering stations response to a letter of inquiry (LOI) addressed cheapest ugg boots in usa both licensees actions with regard to the contest.The licensee stated in the application that it had recently discovered that its license had expired and that it needed an STA to continue operating the station.The Bureau determined that, contrary to the argument presented in response to the LOI, neither negligence nor inadvertence due to the overseeing employees departure can absolve licensees of liability.Enforcement Monitor reveals numerous cases where a station was accused of having failed to disclose revolve clothing coupon code 20 off on-air a material term of a contest, or of deviating from the announced rules in conducting a contest.The revised Contest Rule does not, however, dictate the precise location on the home page where the link or tab must be located.Rather than require broadcasters to announce the website address each time the station mentions or advertises the contest as proposed in the nprm, the R O mandates that broadcasters announce the website address periodically. .In fact, the FCC asks in the nprm whether its rules should dictate a set of material terms to be disclosed online.These investigations usually arise in response to a consumer complaint that the contest was not conducted in the manner the consumer expected.Chief among these is a mandate that broadcasters posting material contest terms online also periodically announce the website address where the terms are posted. .The brokering licensee further indicated that it forgot about the contest until it received the FCCs LOI, and, after receiving the LOI, the second phase of the contest occurred and was completed by January 2010.The Commission framed the Contest Rule changes as a win for both broadcasters and the public. .The Bureau further found that the licensees failed to fully disclose the material terms of the contest as required by the Commissions rules.the Commission declined to adopt this proposal. .Therefore, the license expired in April of 2002.The FCC recently issued a Forfeiture Order to the former licensee of a Private Land Mobile Radio Service (plmrs) station.The Forfeiture Order follows an NAL that the FCC released in July of 2012 proposing a fine of 20,000 for the former licensee of the facility for operating without a license for nine years and causing interference to another wireless service provider.What terms will be material and essential to making a disclosure not false or misleading is a very fact-specific issue, and will vary significantly depending on the exact nature of the contest involved.This months issue includes: FCC Proposes 12,000 in Fines for Contest Violations 20,000 Fine for Unlicensed Operation and Interference.The Commission declined to specify a minimum number of times per day that such announcements must be made, suggesting instead that the number of announcements should increase with the frequency with which a contest is mentioned or advertised. .
In response to comments received pursuant to the nprm, which suggested that a literal interpretation of such a requirement could be read to require a mechanical recitation of a web address as it appears on an Internet browser (.g., http-colon-backslash, etc.
Changing Rules and Delay in Conducting Contest Lead to 12,000 in Fines.